re e series tractors. now you can own america's tractor for just $99 a month. learn more at your john deere dealer.

as we've been talking about president trump is expected to end the daca program. most don't even know of a life outside the united states. enrique ramirez is a daca

recipient perhaps more commonly known as a dreeler. enrique, thank you for joining us. you heard the conversation before. what did you think about the dreamers somehow are taking the jobs of americans and are causing wages to be stagnant? do you agree with that? >> i don't agree with that at all. i didn't agree with a lot of the points i heard. i especially liked the point you made that we didn't -- a lot of dreamers, including me, didn't make the choice to come here. you said i was 2 when i came to the u.s. i don't remember anything about mexico or the place i was born. the only country i know is the united states, and i've lived in -- i grew up in houston. my parents thought that schooling was important. since i've been here i've tried my best. i graduated at the top of my high school. i just graduated from harvard. all these schools have invested so much money in me.

when i hear that daca is going to end, from an objective standpoint it sounds like a bad call because i won't be able to give back to my community. i won't be able to give back some of the investment that's been placed in me now by texas. now i just started my first year at the university of texas school of law. and if daca goes away, i won't be able to become a lawyer. i won't be able to practice. i won't be able to put to use all these degrees i've had. >> how do you respond to when someone says you should do it legally, the fact is that your parents or your guardian, whoever, brought you here, broke the law and someone has to suffer the consequence of breaking the law, that there are laws in place. how do you respond to that? >> i think i would first make a distinction between the decision my parents made and the decision i had. i had no decision. like you said earlier, i don't

know -- mexico is not a country that's known to me. i'd respond with please, let me know how i can follow the law. i'm more than willing to comply. i'm a huge patriot. i want to comply. i'm even studying the law and trying to figure out how best to be a citizen even since i was young. i'm an eagle scout. my brother and i who is also undocumented was heavily involved in the boy scouts. if there's any country we love and we love to follow its laws is the united states. the only country we know. >> i want to play something enrique. this is something from interviewed before he was president, donald trump did back in 2012. take a listen. >> as an example you have people in this country for 20 years. they've done a great job. they've done wonderfully. they've gone to school. they've gotten good marks. they're productive. now we're supposed to send them out of the country? i don't believe in that, michelle. and you understand that. >> basically he's describing

you. so what goes through your head when you hear him say that? >> i believe him. the night of the election i remember where i was. i was with a group of undocumented students at harvard. i was one of the few who was skeptical about whether trump would follow his plan to deport 11 million undocumented immigrants. i heard this, i thought he really meant that he had a soft spot for dreamers like me and the other harvard students that i was in the room with. and now i'm losing that hope because of the announcements he's come to make. i don't know and he's known to be unpredictable. i guess those are also words that he said to get some kind of support, and there was no intention or, you know, a follow-through on that. >> you said that you're losing hope. how are you -- is there a sense of fear among dreamers now of

what the president might do? >> for the past five years that i've had daca, i've had the ability to get jobs and apply to fellowships and even study abroad and participate in all kinds of programs, i was able to lose the fear of being deported that i lived with before having daca. and this last week i held orientation my first week of law school, i started having realizations that that fear is going to have to set in again. it hasn't been nice at all. i'm also from houston. and my family home experienced a lot of flooding and everything. it's been a lot. that's one thing that really stuck out with me this week is that every time i drive, my license will expire once i'm not able to apply to daca anymore. every time i want to drive my mom to a doctor's appointment or any sister to church or anything, i'll have to be

conscious that one mistake, i roll a stop sign or one infraction could send me back to a country i don't know and i could lose, you know, everything i've worked for so far. >> what do you say to the president right now if he's watching? >> i would tell him to not discontinue daca, please. it's changed my life. it's changed the life of my siblings. it's changed the life of so many hard working undocumented students who just want to get back and who don't know any other country, are deeply patriotic. we all want to make this a better place. >> thank you. enrique ramirez, we appreciate your time. >> no, thank you. thank you so much for having me. when we come back, the president has three major crises on his plate tonight. his decision to end daca, threats from north korea, major damage from hurricane harvey. how is he dealing with all these issues? we'll talk about that next. ♪ we're drowning in information.

where, in all of this, is the stuff that matters? the stakes are so high, your finances, your future. how do you solve this? you don't. you partner with a firm that advises governments and the fortune 500, and, can deliver insight person to person, on what matters to you. morgan stanley. for tech advice. dell small business advisor with one phone call, i get products that suit my needs and i get back to business. ♪ copdso to breathe better,athe. i go with anoro.

♪go your own way copd tries to say, "go this way." i say, "i'll go my own way" with anoro. ♪go your own way once-daily anoro contains two medicines called bronchodilators, that work together to significantly improve lung function all day and all night. anoro is not for asthma . it contains a type of medicine that increases risk of death in people with asthma. the risk is unknown in copd. anoro won't replace rescue inhalers for sudden symptoms and should not be used more than once a day. tell your doctor if you have a heart condition, high blood pressure, glaucoma, prostate, bladder, or urinary problems. these may worsen with anoro. call your doctor if you have worsened breathing, chest pain, mouth or tongue swelling, problems urinating, vision changes, or eye pain while taking anoro. ask your doctor about anoro. ♪go your own way get your first prescription free at anoro.com.

the damage from hurricane harvey and the north korean threat and now questions surrounding the fate of daca, president trump has his hands full. i want to discuss this now with cnn political commentator mark jennings, mike shields and keith boykin. good evening, gentlemen. holiday weekend, thank you so much for joining us. so mark, you first. you say president trump ending daca is an assault on our civil

liberties. explain that. >> it's not just a question of civil liberties. it's a question of what's fair and what's just. you played sound this hour from president trump himself saying, hey, this is something that i won't do. there's no logical reason to do this. and now we enter a moment where he's doing the exact opposite. the question is why. it seems to me at a moment where president trump is being assailed from many sides, he's creating another smokescreen by creating a solution to something that's not really a problem. he did this before with trans soldiers in the military a few weeks ago. he's appealing to a constituents. >> you say this is mostly about president trump keeping campaign promise.

here's the reporting in "the new york times" last week the president asked, this is a quote, his aides for a way out of a dilemma he created by promising to roll back the program pop so what's the thinking behind the president's decision. >> it's not a dilemma he created by making this promise. this is being challenged in court. attorneys general were going to force the administration to defend the government's position in court. and that really prompted the president to act. look, i've got a big prediction for you on your show here. the congress will actually support the daca, the dreamers, they'll pass legislation, which is what should happen to make this legal because it was illegal when president obama did it. it had to be made legal by the congress. and president trump will sign it into law. what he's saying is i don't want to do this. i kind of have to do it. i'm giving you six months to create a deadline. things only happen when there's a deadline. let's create a deadline, they may put enforcement, they may put border funding for the wall

and things to keep conservatives happy. it will wind occuup on presiden trump's desk and he'll sign it. that's my prediction for you. we just won't have a situation where he has 800,000 people separated from their families. >> you're shaking your head but i guess it isn't in agreement. >> i just hope that mike shields is right. i don't think that's likely to be what happens. clearly setting a deadline wasn't enough to get congress to act. there were repeated deadlines and congress failed to do anything. the fact that the are attorneys general who want to sue and have threatened to sue should not be a reason to put 800,000 people's lives in jeopardy which is what president trump is threatening to do tomorrow. if that is the case, then why couldn't the administration just continue to pursue the litigation aspect of it? because attorney general jeff sessions is refusing to defend

the constitutionality of this. this is prosecutorial discretion. it's prosecutorial discretion. this is what the executive branch does. they have the right to determine how to administer the laws, to determine which cases would be pursued and which wouldn't be pursued. >> i'm sure you didn't think that on the travel ban executive order when that was challenged in court. >> the travel ban was struck down by a federal court. let it go to court. this has not been struck down as being unconstitutional. >> the difference with this and healthcare is that i think democrats will actually work with republicans to vote and pass something for daca whereas they wouldn't help on healthcare. >> let me ask you something or mike real quick, then i'll bring scott in. mike, then explain why not let it go to court? because i think according to -- i forget who i had on earlier that they were threatening to bring it to court, that they weren't sure they were going to bring it to court.

why not let it go to court? >> because then you're asking the administration to defend something that its lawyers and team had looked at and believe are unconstitutional because of the policy behind it when that's not the proper way. this is the difference between constitutional conservatives that helped elect president trump and democrats and people on the left who say, let's just do this and the president can decide it whenever he wants to because we have a policy we agree with. this should come from the congress. i think the congress will pass it. the president has put this on their table where it's supposed to be and say, no, i won't get dragged into court and discuss something that i actually don't believe is constitutional even though i want it to happen. that's why there were stories coming out that the president was really -- >> why not just say let's make this constitutional under the law, find out a way to do it. >> because the way to make it constitutional is to have congress pass it. what trump is saying in givening a six-month window to congress, he hasn't said it word for word,

but he'll sign it. >> yeah, scott. >> these dreamers deserve certainty. i think mike is right, the way to give them certainty is for congress to pass a law. we've learned executive orders don't give anyone certainty because when the administration changes they can do away with the previous administration's executive orders. what the president has done is put this squarely in the lap of the congress. i hope mike is right. i hope the dreamers get the certainty they deserve. it would be the compassionate thing to do. mike is also right, if they do it, the president will sign it into law. >> marc lamont-hill, since you brought this up, i think it was you. it could have been keith. i'm not sure. it's been a long weekend. >> don't get us mixed up. >> no, that's not it. i can't even remember earlier who brought it up. this has been a long week. let's hear what president trump has said on this issue. >> we're always talking about

dreamers for other people. i want the children that are growing up in the united states to be dreamers also. they're not dreaming right now. >> we will immediately terminate president obama's two illegal executive amnesties. it's a very, very tough subject. we're going to deal with daca with heart. we love the dreamers. we love everybody. >> so he is reportedly, marc, giving a six-month delay. is that showing heart? >> a generous read as has been said that he's trying to reach a meets constitutional muster. >> in there you saw he's for it and against it. then sort of not sure where he's going. >> he's all over the map with it, number one. number two, to say that the way to create safety is through congress is absurd.

obamacare came through congress and still it's under attack. also immigration is one of the things that congress has been least likely to act on. they've been the most difficult to make any substantive change over. under every presidential administration. to think that an issue that is not agreed upon and doesn't draw neatly upon party lines is somehow going to be resolved in six months is hopeful at best and maybe even somewhat nigh aefb to believe that. this is something that donald trump is setting up to the extreme part of his fwas and fulfill a nasty campaign promise to put the pressure on the necks of immigrants than it is to actually move forward in something that's humane and reasonable for vulnerable people, particularly children. >> the president of the hispanic chamber of commerce referenced those comments soed and said that the president would be ahere if he still went ahead and ended daca. does he have a point? >> if president trump vetoed the

bill that congress passed to fix this, then that would be true. i don't think that president trump can continue to do something that they think is christians in the republican party are not going to be okay ripping families apart and punishing children who are being punished for nothing they did. senator james langford is no squish, he's a conservative. said, we don't punish children for the behavior of their parents. i think there will be -- that's why you'll have republicans and i believe democrats working together. they'll put it on the president's desk. the test is on daca is now going to be, when congress passes something and puts it on the president's desk, does he sign it into law? i think that's the real test for people on his diversity council. they'll probably have wall funding or something put in there. you'll have to keep some folks happy on enforcement, but i just don't see even republicans and democrats --

>> mike, i got to go. because i got to get to this important bit of news here. i need mike to tell me about harlan lowell mitchell jennings. who just was -- >> yes, scott jennings, congratulations. >> scott jennings, sorry about that. tell me about that. >> real news. >> yeah, baby harlan, our fourth boy was born in louisville on wednesday, we brought him home on friday and he's named after john justin harlan, known as the great dissenter on the u.s. supreme court. he was the lone dissenter in plessy versus ferguson. he joins his three brothers at home. he's home with momma watching the show. appreciate you bringing it up. >> congratulations. >> and he's a dreamer, not in the sense we've been talking about. >> no, he's safe. >> thank you, guys. we'll be right back.

we were talking about harvey but breaking news, irma, category 4 storm. thank you for joining us. florida, puerto rico already declared states of emergency. fill us in on where irma is heading? >> it's not looking good because the model run on a very consistent track of where we think this will head. bee line to the west, the turks and caicos, bahamas, direct path of the storm system. notice how compact this area of

the computer models. you look at the run-to-run consistency. that's there friday into saturday. beyond that we think the storm will want to turn to the right come saturday into sunday. at this point that will put florida in the path of this. notice a couple outliers want to take it into the gulf, a couple do what we hope for, pushing it back out into the atlantic. it's right across southern florida where we're concerned because the environment this storm system is entering is not only conducive for strengthening but potentially retaining that and taking it up into a category 5. again, we're watching that because the water temperatures in that region approaching 90 degrees as we approach saturday morning when this is just south of florida. >> and we'll be watching it with our entire weather team. we appreciate that. that's it for us tonight. thanks for watching. i'll see you tonight. john vause will pick up in a few moments live from los angeles.

♪ sailin' away on the crest of a wave, it's like magic ♪ ♪ rollin' and ridin' and slippin' and slidin' ♪ ♪ it's magic introducing the all new volkswagen tiguan. ♪ higher and higher, baby the new king of the concrete jungle.

hello and welcome to our viewers in the united states and around the world. >> i'm ishasesay. >> i'm john vause. >> from u.n. headquarters in new york to korean peninsula, condemnation over north korea's latest nuclear attack. >> the u.n. ambassador accused

kimbegging for war and nikki haley wants the strongest sanctions on north korea. >> seoul's ability to wipe out kim's regime and a new willingness from the south korean defense minister to review plans with u.s. tactical nukes on the korean peninsula. >> a lot to get to over the coming hours but we'll start with our reporter live in seoul. >> reporter: john and isha, the u.s. and south korea are increasing the military pressure on north korea after the north tested its sixth nuclear weapon over the weekend, believed to be the most powerful weapons test yet. we know the president of south korea, moon jae-in, finally spoke on the phone with donald trump and they agreed on how powerful ballistic missiles can be. with more, here's barbara starr.

>> reporter: this live fire exercise by south korean forces, a direct military response to the north's largest nuclear test. army and air forces simulating an attack on north korea's nuclear test site. even as north korean state media issued new threats to the u.s., including guam, one editorial saying, every time the u.s. goes crazy talking about sanctions and war, our will of vengeance will become hundred and thousand times stronger. u.n. ambassador nikki haley very much in the hard line mode backing kim. >> his abusive use of missiles and his nuclear threats show that he is begging for war. war is never something the united states wants. we don't want it now. >> reporter: rising tensions to james mattis to where he never wants to be, center stage at the

white house. >> any threat to the united states or its territories, including guam or our allies will be met with a massive military response, a response both effective and overwhelming. >> reporter: but are there credible military options without thousands of casualties? >> i think secretary mattis was doing was simply trying to convince the north we have this option and they can't be certain we wouldn't use it under certain circumstances. >> reporter: it may be the most critical decision ever for donald trump. >> how much of a price we are willing to pay how much we're willing to bleed to accomplish our objectives. this is a decision not for military members. this is a decision for elected political leaders to make. and they always have to weigh the cost versus the benefit. >> short of u.s. attack, the

pentagon could send an aircraft carrier offshore. the "ronald reagan" is nearby. more bombers are nearby. south korea and japan upping their defense in cooperation with the u.s., but there is no indication kim jong-un is listening. >> translator: we predict north korea could fire an intercontinental ballistic missile to show that they have obtained the means of delivering a nuclear bomb to the united states. >> reporter: some u.s. military assets could move closer to the korean peninsula in the coming days. nothing has been announced yet. but the bottom line is, would any of this change kim jong-un's mind about proceeding with his weapons program? the betting money is, it won't. barbara starr, cnn, the pentagon. cnn has reporters covering this story around the globe. ian lee joins me in seoul. alexander field is live in tokyo. let's go to ian first.

another show of force this morning. more live fire drills in south korea. what is seoul trying to prove? >> reporter: this is just a show of force to the north koreans. this time that show of force coming from the eastern seas where they have this naval warships demonstrating their readiness in the event of a war. now we've seen the air force. we've seen the amy and the navy getting involved. south korea saying that they're ready for any acts aggressive by the north koreans. we had that very important phone call between president moon and president trump. this phone call coming well after 24 hours after that nucle nuclear test. in that same time period, president trump spoke with president abe twice. that didn't go unnoticed in seoul. in that phone conversation they did come to some agreement as far as further military

operation and as you pointed out earlier, limiting the limit on the payload that the ballistic missiles can carry from south korea, also talking about billions of dollars of weapons and equipment. the one big question, though, as well is, will south korea allow american nuclear weapons to be placed on their soil? we heard from the defense minister saying he's willing to consider that as an option, although the president's administration, their office said right now they're still committed to the denuclearization of the korean peninsula. >> that's right. and that debate is under way. now, from ian, let's go to alexander field standing by in tokyo. it's interesting because today we saw that second day of the show of force of south korea. visually we haven't seen that kind of response from japan. why is that and what options does tokyo have? >> right. the only real visual move you

have seen from tokyo in response to that sixth nuclear test has been the decision to deploy its sniffer planes in order to monitor the air in the region to see if there has been any radioactive material. that sort of underscores just how close the potential threat from north korea is to japan. the posture in japan is always a defensive one. yes, they do regularly engage in military drills with the united states to enhance its defensive posture, but you don't see this kind of show of force from certainly the japanese military that you are seeing right now from south korea's military. they are, though, very much focused on the threat that north korea has continued to present. don't forget, this is something that japan has been dealing with at the forefront for weeks and months as we see kim jong-un regime take on this ballistic tests. we've seen so many missiles splash down in the waters off of japan, not to mention the latest intermediate range missile that

actually flew right over japan, prompting that warning that told residents on the northern island of japan to seek shelter. again, we always talk about the pacifist constitution in japan. we know they're leaning closely on their ally, the u.s. and international partners to try and resolve the crisis. what option are they pushing for? the only solution they see at this point is really the diplomatic solution. they were quick to call for that emergency meeting of the united states security council. they have been loudly and forcibly pressing not just for the full enforcement of sanctions against north korea but also for additional sanctions. they think it's essential to cut off that hard currency to north korea which helps fuel its illicit programs. on top of that, we're hearing from the cabinet secretary in japan who briefed the press today, talking again about the need for additional sanctions which was discussed at the u.n. security council meeting pep also did comment on that

proposal you continue to hear from china and russia, this freeze for freeze option by which you would have the u.s. and south korea sken military put a stop to this annual training exercises which enraged pyongyang. in exchange they say pyongyang could suspend its nuclear and missile program. japan through the cabinet secretary saying, no, that's not something they support. they see these exercises as an essential deterrent in the face of this mounting nuclear threat. >> so japan firmly putting the emphasis on diplomacy after that sixth test and after that assessment from south korean government officials that north korea may be launching another icbm and conducting another test. alexander field live in tokyo, ian lee live in seoul. a big thank you to you both. let's go to my colleague john vause. >> thank you. we'll hear from you in the coming hours. in the meantime, we'll continue on. joining us, paul carroll, senior adviser with n-square, a group working to reduce nuclear

threats, and retired colonel rick. the biggest question is who is helping the north koreans? u.n. experts looked at rocket parts from a satellite launched by pyongyang. they found many key components were foreign made. they say this demonstrates high-end foreign sourced components. is beijing or unwilling to stop those sales? if it can't stop the sale of missile parts, can they actually cut off fuel or are they willing to cut off fuel to north korea? >> thanks, john. i think it's more unable than willing. they're two parts of the same coin. there's a vast array of international businesses, front companies, many are chinese, but they're not only chinese. the north koreans have shown they're very deft at exploiting gaps in the international sanction system, in the export control system. so i wouldn't lay the blame at

the government of china necessarily, but i would say that the north koreans have figured out how to exploit the network of relationships and of motivations to get around these sanctions. >> and rick francona, as far as the military option goes, is the u.s. in any position to start an offensive against north korea? wouldn't that type of buildup take weeks, maybe months? >> absolutely. there is no -- there is no stomach for that right now. i don't see any any possibility the united states would launch a pre-emptive attack against north korea unless they thought there was an imminent threat against the united states o one of our allies or an island like guam. i don't think that's in the cards. i know they're doing the plans for it, but i don't see that happening because the consequences of such an action would just be catastrophic. it would trigger a regional war. it would trigger a north korean invasion of south korea and we would be in a long ground war

that we're not prepared to fight. >> the immediate challenge is this possibility of another icbm launch in the coming days, maybe in the coming hours. what happens then? >> well, i don't think necessarily that would be a game-changer either. this is something kim jong-un has shown his frequency and tempo of missile test is rapid, unprecedented from his grandfather and father. this is something that should be expected. what i would worry about is that the united states or alice would attempt attempt to shut down a missile launch. there's conversations about the thaad system, the pac-3 systems. we have a number of systems that have checkered success rates. i would be concerned if we tried to shoot something down that wasn't an imminent threat to our alice' or our own. first, we would miss and we would have egg on our face or if

we hit a missile that would be tantamount to war, that colonel francona laid out, ugly to say the least. >> what we're seeing on the south korean side is the defense minister said he told the united states to increase presence in the region, more long-range bombers, aircraft carriers. also looking at redeployment of tactical nuclear weapons. how would that increase not just the tension or the risk of some type of accidental conflict? >> he's looking at this as a show of force. we've seen the south korean military do that over the past few days. they're trying to prove to the north koreans they're not just relying on the united states, but they're actively involved and they're not willing to c cowtow to north koreans. we can deliver nuclear weapons to north korea from a vaerlt of different platforms. we don't have to have them on a peninsula. putting thome a peninsula puts

them at risk. we need to make you are the north koreans understand we have that capability. i think secretary mattis' statement is about where we need to be. any threat would trigger this massive retaliation. but careful to indicate that we're not looking for a war with north korea. we are looking for some diplomatic strategy that works. but we have to make sure when we do that. i think recognizing as a nuclear power, a nuclear weapons power is the first step. but we have to make sure it doesn't go beyond that and we end up in a position where the north koreans start dictating our policy in the region by saying, unless you withdraw troops from south korea, we'll start a nuclear war. we have to make sure we don't get to that point. >> that point seems like it's getting ever and ever personal. thank you for joining us. time for a quick break here. the fate of hundreds of thousands of young people who came to the u.s. illegally as

children hangs in the balance. how president trump's coming decision could change everything for so-called d.r.e.a.m.ers. also ahead, why the international community has been so slow to offer help in the wake of hurricane harvey. i make it easy to save $600 on car insurance, so being cool comes naturally. hmm. i can't decide if this place is swag or bling. it's pretzels. word. ladies, you know when you switch,

you get my bomb-diggity discounts automatically. ♪ no duh, right? [ chuckles ] sir, you forgot -- keep it. you're gonna need it when i make it precipitate. what, what? what? what, what? you don't let anything lkeep you sidelined. come on! that's why you drink ensure. with 9 grams of protein, and 26 vitamins and minerals... for the strength and energy, to get back to doing what you love. ensure, always be you. announcer: your daughter just had her first breakup. do you... [both sobbing] don't worry, sweetie. this is gonna happen a lot. announcer: or... "nice, single boys." heh heh. that was weird. announcer: as a parent, there are no perfect answers, but you don't have to be perfect to a perfect parent. thousands of teens in foster care will love you just the same.

hello, everyone. u.s. business leaders are urging president trump and congress to

preserve an obama-era program, the protection and deportation of hundreds of thousands of young people who were brought to the u.s. illegally as children. >> on tuesday the president is expected to announce an end to the program known as deferred action for childhood arrivals, or daca, but he's giving congress a six-month window to act. as candidate donald trump said he would keep daca but now his tone has softened. >> we will immediately terminate president trump's two illegal executive amnesties. >> we're always talking about draemers for other people. i want the children growing up in the united states to dream also. they're not dreaming. daca is a very, very difficult subject for me. to me, its one of the most difficult subjects i have. it's a very, very tough subject. we are going to deal with daca with heart. >> should d.r.e.a.m.ers be worried?

>> we love the d.r.e.a.m.ers. we love everybody. >> for more on this decision and how it will affect young, undocumented immigrants moving forward, we're joined by former mayor of los angeles. thank you for joining us. >> thank you for having me. >> president trump has been all over the map when it has come to the issue of daca and what he said about d.r.e.a.m.ers. most recently he's talked about love and heart. how do you square that with this expected decision? >> well, obviously, there's no heart. it breaks your heart. certainly breaks mine. i love this country. my grandpa came here 100 years ago. i know what this country has always stood for. it hasn't always been true to what it stood for but you have to feel a disappointment that the president and this administration would go as far as saying these people are no longer welcome, we're going to

send them back. they can't fight for our country. they can't contribute to the economy. i think we should all feel a little ashamed. >> is this decision, if it happens as expected by donald trump, is it more to do with the legality of daca? is it more to do with the constitution? presidential overreach? all of these open-ended legal questions right now. or is it more to do with a president who seems to do everything he can right now to shore up his own base? >> to feed his base. it's all politics. you've heard him say he's got a heart. these are decent people working. they can stay here to the things he may be doing tomorrow. the fact of the matter is, this is an attempt to feed his base at a time when his approval ratings are in the toilet, they're in the tank. it's clear, i think to many of us, it's also a way to distract people from the fact they

haven't accomplished anything in the last nine months or so. >> you mentioned politics and the lack of accomplishments. the expectation is the president will punt this to congress. speaker paul ryan did say he did not want to see the end of daca and he thought congress should have a chance to fix this. the first d.r.e.a.m. act was intoed in 2001 and failed in the senate in 2010. do you see anything in 2017 to make you believe that they can fix this in congress? >> i hope so. i don't see it but i hope so. and i pray. look, whether you're democrat or republican, we have to acknowledge these young people know no other country but this one. as i said, they're defending our country, they're contributing to our economy, they're going to our schools. we should be able to come together, democrat and republican, and put the country first. put these kids first.

over the next ten years, it would be a $460 billion impact to our economy. not to mention the wasted lives that would come if we just sent them back. if we said they couldn't work here f they had to go back underground, in the underground economy again. i'm praying that if the white house doesn't have the heart, that the congress will have the heart to move ahead and give these young people a legal status. >> mr. mayor, let's talk quickly about options going forward. if this goes down the way it's expected to, we've already heard from the new york governor, andrew cuomo and the attorney general, saying they will sue on behalf of the d.r.e.a.m.ers. what do you want to see california do? what are you thinking in terms of how to fight this? >> we'll take a page out of

texas' book, use the tenth amendment to stand up for these young people. we'll pass laws. as an example, you need a warrant to come into hospital, to come into a courthouse, to come into school, to come into places where you otherwise don't have a right to be except if you have a warrant. we're going to mark a different path. nearly 25% of the d.r.e.a.m.ers live in california. we're the sixth largest economy in the world and we're the epicenter of the undocumented immigrants in the united states of america. we're the most diverse state in the nation. and it's been good for us. so, i think you're going to see us creatively use the laws in the courts to stand for a different proposition. mother liberty's proposition. bring me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses. come to this country, work hard, play by the rules, you'll live that american dream. >> quickly, you talked about the

sheer facts, the cost, the numbers. you said $400 billion from d.r.e.a.m.ers over the next decade -- >> $460 billion. >> this is the -- >> u.s. by the way, that's the center for american progress that studied that. >> steve. >> as it relates to immigration, the president is very focused on legal immigration. as you said, this is a complicated issue and something i'm sure the president will consider carefully. as it relates to the economic impact, i'm less concerned about the economic impact. we'll make sure we have plenty of workers in this economy. we want to put more people back to work. there's a lot of people that left the workforce and our objective is to bring them back into the workforce. >> how do you respond to that? >> there's no basis in fact for what he just said. it's not just the center for american progress.

virtually, every academic look at the impact of immigration here in the united states of america. a recent study said there's a $715 billion impact to the california economy alone. the d.r.e.a.m.ers, $460 billion over the next ten years. the notion that we could just lose these kids when we have in california alone a 1.5 million that need a college education by 2030, another 1 million that need skills by 2030. these d.r.e.a.m.ers are people that could help us meet those goals and impact the economy. so, what he's saying has no basis in fact. i haven't seen a study that would confirm what he's just said. >> okay. thank you so much for coming in. >> thank you for having me. >> come back again, okay? >> i'm just down the street, so invite me. >> any time. >> we'll call, don't worry. >> thank you.

well, coming up here, the world rushed to help the u.s. after hurricane kathy, but 12 years later in the wake of a bigger disaster, there seems to be fewer offers of aid and support. the reasons why in just a moment. just as recovery ramps up after harvey, another dangerous storm could be heading towards the u.s. we are tracking for you hurricane irma. the latest after this. esurance does insurance a smarter way. which saves money. they offer paperless billing and automatic payments. which saves paper. which saves money. they offer home and auto coverage, so you can bundle your policies. which saves hassle. which saves money. and they offer a single deductible. which means you only pay once when something like this happens. which saves money. esurance was born online and built to save. and when they save, you save. that's home and auto insurance for the modern world. esurance. an allstate company. click or call.